Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

Errorboros OP t1_jbwgvfv wrote

In case you missed it, this is the BBC reporting on how the BBC got in trouble with the BBC after a commentator for the BBC tweeted something that conservatives didn't like.

272

alexanderpas t1_jbwugk6 wrote

It's actually a good thing that articles like this can exist.

104

Embarrassed_Fix9713 t1_jby82hy wrote

honest he did say language rather than acts, very decisive rhetoric is being used to turn people against any sort of refugee or asylum seeker.

34

stonedPict t1_jbycbfr wrote

also the nazis were originally planning to send jews to camps in madagascar (technically it was a polish plan from 37 and the nazis considered it in 1940 but semantics)

14

SpambotSwatter t1_jc1gm80 wrote

/u/Embarrassed_Fix9713 is a scammer! It is stealing comments to farm karma in an effort to "legitimize" its account for engaging in scams and spam elsewhere. Please downvote their comment and click the report button, selecting Spam then Harmful bots.

Please give your votes to the original comment, found here.

With enough reports, the reddit algorithm will suspend this scammer.

^(Karma farming? Scammer?? Read the pins on my profile for more information.)

2

AlternativeFormer559 t1_jbx3zmz wrote

It's coming to something when the most astute and progressive voice in British politics is a multimillionaire ex-footballer. But good luck to him, he's got my vote.

50

Haircut117 t1_jbydfiq wrote

I would argue that Jonathan Pie (aka Tom Walker) is far better than Gary on both counts. Unfortunately he doesn't have the same following.

8

24-Hour-Hate t1_jcdb3ap wrote

What gets me is that it's not even fucking progressive! When all this kicked off I looked up the tweet and the policy and I was just shocked at just how...tepid the tweet actually was compared to what I expected considering how angry some people were/are. I mean, we're at the point where saying you don't like a policy and stating some facts about it is considered progressive? We can't accept this. We cannot concede this to conservatives. Reality is not negotiable.

1

BeingEnglishIsACult t1_jbwnsd4 wrote

Can they write a headline: Head of BBC is a Tory stooge.

Or does that make them impartial?

49

Errorboros OP t1_jbwsbac wrote

"Contact Between Dick and Johnson Raises Questions As BBC Head Shafts Lineker"

32

BigOmet t1_jbxfic6 wrote

That's more like a Daily Mail headline but they're not that clever

6

VoDoka t1_jbxctnn wrote

The BBC trilemma with all 3 corners of that triangle being the BBC...

12

pulltheanimal t1_jbyiiqg wrote

Seems like a plot line from the comedy W1A which fictitiously followed the inner workings of the BBC.

6

[deleted] t1_jbwm2hg wrote

[removed]

−82

YoggyYog t1_jbwtxfs wrote

But that’s literally what happened

36

[deleted] t1_jbx2lzc wrote

[removed]

−59

IntrusiveIndustries t1_jbx49u1 wrote

Well they didn't like it, it's not bias if it's true.

29

[deleted] t1_jbx89y9 wrote

[removed]

−43

IntrusiveIndustries t1_jbx8hty wrote

The Conservative party. Not the faux ideology people misguidedly make their whole personality.

26

[deleted] t1_jbx9bu1 wrote

[removed]

−15

IntrusiveIndustries t1_jbx9w5k wrote

But Alan sugar can tweet all the racists tweets he likes with impunity. So it's seems the policy is whatever the Conservatives don't like.

26

[deleted] t1_jbxcjc9 wrote

[removed]

−11

doctorkanefsky t1_jbxi3tt wrote

I don’t know how to explain this without being rude about it, but Alan Sugar and Andrew Neil getting away with tweeting Conservative Party talking points while David Attenborough and Gary Lineker being punished for deviating from the script while the BBC chairman is under investigation for bribing his appointer with an 800,000 pound loan makes a mockery of the impartiality the BBC is mandated to uphold by charter.

17

IamStrqngx t1_jbx8586 wrote

Did your feelings get hurt?

14

[deleted] t1_jbx930r wrote

[removed]

−5

IamStrqngx t1_jbx97uw wrote

"left wing bias" if you say so.

18

RailwayFox t1_jbzr53b wrote

My....person Have you (sorry if I'm assuming your pronouns) ever been on Reddit?

1

[deleted] t1_jbx9ek2 wrote

[removed]

0

IamStrqngx t1_jbx9m5y wrote

Most big subreddits are full of incels. r/memes and r/dankmemes are prime examples

12

[deleted] t1_jbxcg1y wrote

[removed]

−4

bigsoftee84 t1_jbxmud4 wrote

Interesting how you go from 'balancing' to trolling.

8

soldforaspaceship t1_jbzbp4i wrote

Do you think laughing at your own jokes makes you sound smarter? It doesn't.

The point they are making is that the BBC had no issue when Linekar criticized Qatar. Or when he criticized Corbyn. So it is exposing a bias at the BBC.

Conservatives is a term given to mean supporters of the Conservative party.

You seemed very confused so I hope that cleared it all up for you.

2

thisistheSnydercut t1_jbxldhg wrote

Hey you could always set up a protest if you feel like your political opinion is being ignored?

Oh wait. You can't. Because they made it illegal. Because they're fucking Nazis.

5

HardlyAnyGravitas t1_jbyiyml wrote

If Reddit does have a left-wing bias, why do you think that is?

How do you explain a (any) bias in a platform that doesn't editorialise and that anyone can contribute to?

There are plenty of right-wing subreddits. The fact that they're unpopular and filled with nut-jobs maybe says that being 'left-wing' isn't, in fact, a bias but just what human decency looks like when you take away establishment propaganda.

Just a thought.

4

pickyourpants t1_jbzaaza wrote

Their definition of impartial makes no sense. Legislation is passed by whichever party or coalition is in power. Criticizing a piece of legislation will, therefore, always be a criticism of whoever was in power when it was passed. To remain impartial, according to the BBC’s definition means never criticizing legislation. Which means the BBC cannot hold politicians accountable for poor decisions.

Impartial means looking at the impact of the legislation rather than commenting on who wrote it. As far as I can see, that’s what Lineker did in his tweet.

48

Darzok t1_jc1wlgq wrote

No it means you have to show both sides you can not just call it shit as that is not been impartial that is just been bias since you disagree with it.

−7

mymar101 t1_jbybj1v wrote

So I guess we’re held hostage to conservatives if we want reliable information?

33

retrofauxhemian t1_jbxp02f wrote

"Who could have predicted that the government's asylum policies and the language around them, so robustly criticised by Gary Lineker in his tweets, would end up reducing the BBC's most popular football show to this?"

lol, robust my arse, it was a mild rebuke/ critique. All the meltdowns have come from the top down at the insistence, that rose tinted glasses don't get knocked off. To add to the hilarious optics of this. it's precisely because Linekar is a high profile celebrity talking to a captive audience of what is often a reactionary fanbase, that the Beeb is pushing harder to curtail the message, which of course magnifies it like the Streisand effect.

19

RefanRes t1_jby23qx wrote

Robust means stable or in this case valid. His criticism was correct about the language and tactics the Conservatives use. Therefore it was robust.

14

MidnightCh1cken t1_jbyw86c wrote

What exactly did he say in his Tweet that was so controversial?

7

tauntingbob t1_jbzb6yp wrote

> Good heavens, this is beyond awful.

In the context of Braverman's horrific video about being invaded by hordes.

Followed by:

> There is no huge influx. We take far fewer refugees than other major European countries. This is just an immeasurably cruel policy directed at the most vulnerable people in language that is not dissimilar to that used by Germany in the 30s, and I’m out of order?

28

IAmTheClayman t1_jbzm5zu wrote

Just a reminder that getting “cancelled” isn’t a thing, but the will of the public very much is. The BBC and supporters of the anti-asylum bill have publicly demonstrated that they are in the minority, and attempting to punish Lineker has backfired on the BBC in a major way.

Difficult position for them to be in given the way their funding works, but the smart thing to do would have been not to take any action before seeing which way the wind was blowing

6

Tejanah t1_jbzdcv3 wrote

Seems pretty clear to me - the Director General and the BBC Chairman must resign

4

PinealFever t1_jbzi58j wrote

For telling the truth!

Sheesh!

2

Borisof007 t1_jbz9s8j wrote

What and Gary? OH British Broadcasting...right

1

Tephain t1_jbzdwns wrote

That’s not the reason he is being chased and fired. Stop trying to do the diry job to justify that a man can’t be entitled to make an opinion on his government policies, or otherwise will happen what’s is actually happening.

−8

SAT0SHl t1_jbwhmse wrote

Gary Lineker calling out "The Emperor's new Clothes"

The BBC are the propaganda arm of the NAZIS in power.

And unlike the German people who sat sat back and said nothing as the NAZIS rose before, he is trying to break the cycle.

−55

Bollino313 t1_jbwnrc8 wrote

A lot of germans kept there head down and hoped for it to be over. Another lot profited in one way or the other. A significant amount saw it coming early and died trying to fight it.

25

SAT0SHl t1_jbx720g wrote

Look how many ToriesNazis are commenting in this sub.

9

[deleted] t1_jbwm4w0 wrote

[removed]

8

ElAutismobombismo t1_jbx4ddt wrote

All it takes for evil to win is for good men to do nothing. I'm sure many well intentioned Germans who were just sick and exhausted of the state of their existence after ww1 and finally found a little bit of status quo just didn't have the energy to stand up to the Nazis, and therefore paved the way for their rise (said exhaustion also being the result of commonly occurring fascist tactics which are also oddly bearing a striking resemblance to the Tory party's controversy exhaustion tactics)

The guy isnt argueing his point brilliantly , but you cannot deny this is history repeating itself, that in itself is grossly offensive too.

19

[deleted] t1_jbx8ny2 wrote

[removed]

−7

ElAutismobombismo t1_jbxb3h0 wrote

Its a fine thing that what was being critiqued was the language being used being reminiscent of the methods Nazis used to dehumanise groups of people, nothing to do with the specifics of immigration policy. But cool tangent I guess? A fine way to drop the mask my friend.

15

[deleted] t1_jbxcmvi wrote

[removed]

−12

ElAutismobombismo t1_jbxfi35 wrote

Seeing a blatant and direct connection between the social tactics employed by fascists in the past and those employed in the present is not sophistry, I fear you do not know the meaning of the word.

14

[deleted] t1_jbxgvnk wrote

[removed]

−8

ElAutismobombismo t1_jbxjsyp wrote

Correct, however , the language used to dehumanise certain groups under the nazi regime has been used extensively throughout other similar fascist regimes, and such use of language is present today, this use of fascist rhetoric is disturbing. But once again thank you for your derailment into something only tangentially relevant.

9

iheartrugbyleague t1_jbx1uhp wrote

The Tory government aren't "normal people". They couldn't be less "normal people" if they tried.

13

[deleted] t1_jbx2ret wrote

[removed]

−5

iheartrugbyleague t1_jbxevrk wrote

It's not a left/right thing. This Tory government is horrific. Self-serving and anti-democratic. And maybe check the latest polls out if you think the country still supports these freaks.

7

[deleted] t1_jbxgref wrote

[removed]

−2

daverb70 t1_jbxio0g wrote

Also the centrist, and no doubt centre right view too. These particular Tories are not popular at all, and will very likely lose the next GE. Just wondering what more damage they can do in the meantime. Even Tory friends are struggling to defend them. I honestly can’t understand why anyone with any common sense or compassion would still be supporting them. However, we do have a lot of selfish, stupid and racist people in the UK.

3

doctorkanefsky t1_jbxizwy wrote

I think you are missing the plot on this one. Gary Lineker didn’t create this comparison between Bravermen’s language and the language of 1930s Germany. Lineker is merely signal boosting the words of holocaust survivor Joan Salter. My guess is you aren’t a holocaust survivor, so maybe stop speaking for them, particularly when they are clearly able to speak for themselves.

12

mzivtins t1_jbwy2qe wrote

Comparing the atrocities of WWII against the Jews to an immigration bill was disgusting.

No one in the public sphere like celebrities should be allowed to trivialise the horror and suffering of people in order to make a political statement.

−73

Barmos t1_jbwzhhr wrote

He didn't, you tit.

52

mzivtins t1_jbx0cs5 wrote

Ok, so saying something is Immeasurably cruel and saying its worded the same as policies in the 1930's Germany has nothing do to with the NAZI part and their policies around immigrants, the biggest group being Jews?

The guy is an idiot who is obsessed with being liked, just like all narcissistic celebrities (pretty much all of them)

−66

Barmos t1_jbx1kqc wrote

Mate, they're talking about sending people to camps in another country, that is slightly cruel, and has very unsavoury undertones. And to be honest he did say language rather than acts, very decisive rhetoric is being used to turn people against any sort of refugee or asylum seeker.

It's just your opinion if you think he's an idiot, I think your wrong, he has shown a great deal of understanding.

Final point, I don't think you know what narcissist means.

47

Velvy71 t1_jbx8f39 wrote

I don’t think enough people have realised what is being proposed, your comment sums it up very succinctly

“they’re talking about sending people to camps in another country”

40

Kientha t1_jbx2p2w wrote

The language used in 1930s Germany included the othering of vulnerable groups, scapegoating those groups, talks of an invasion and other similar rhetoric. The rhetoric used by the government includes the othering of vulnerable groups, scapegoating those groups, and talks of an invasion.

Lineker isn't even the first person to call this out. A Holocaust survivor wrote to Braverman in January asking her to tone down the rhetoric which she refused to apologise for and said would continue.

Now personally, I think comparisons to 1970s Italy would be far more apt, but the comparison isn't wrong just not the best fit.

29

VonnegutGNU t1_jbx2805 wrote

They weren't immigrants, not anymore than the Turkish people in Turkey. Jews lived in Germany before Columbus ever set foot in the new world, and you don't call modern Caribbean people immigrants.

13

Rogue_elefant t1_jbx09wk wrote

Your wilful misrepresentation of what was said is also kinda disgusting.

34

Trips-Over-Tail t1_jbydcbd wrote

He wasn't trivialising it. He was boosting the words of Joan Salter, holocaust survivor, who has been saying this exact thing for weeks.

25

RefanRes t1_jby13cf wrote

He didnt compare the atrocities of WW2 to the immigration bill. He mentioned the 1930s which was before the war began. He compared the language of the bill with that language that was used by the fascists in that time in order to start Germany toward their darkest path. The fact is that the Conservatives have been using the same mass manipulation tactics that helped Hitler climb to power. It doesn't mean that he thinks the Conservatives are as bad as Hitler but we should be concerned that they could manipulate their way into authoritarianism rather than democracy.

There are important lessons to learn from what happened in the 1930s in order to make sure that no country ever finds themselves even stepping close to that path. It didn't start with the Holocaust. It started with manipulative language, awful policies, gaslighting and villainising those who spoke against the Nazi party. This is exactly what the Tories have done since they came into power.

21

soldforaspaceship t1_jbzc4yf wrote

You know what the victims of the Holocaust might have liked? Someone calling out dehumanizing language before the Holocaust happened. They would have liked it to never get that far. They wouldn't have liked people pretending everything is OK.

Do you know how I know this? Because an actual Holocaust survivor called out the exact same thing.

6

Fordmister t1_jbzi2uk wrote

Mate the board of British Jews and the Auschwitz museum beat him to that comparison by over a month.... or are is the UK's biggest Jewish organisation and major holocaust memorial groups trivializing the holocaust now?

4